Macklin defends schools policy

TONY JONES: Well, just a short time ago I spoke to the shadow education spokeswoman Jenny Macklin about Labor's new schools funding policy.

She joined us from our Brisbane studios.

Jenny Macklin, thanks for joining us.

JENNY MACKLIN, OPPOSITION DEPUTY LEADER: My pleasure.

TONY JONES: You've shied away from the class warfare line, but why shy away from it when, after all, there is a long tradition of class warfare in Australian politics?

JENNY MACKLIN: Because Labor's schools policy is all about making sure we fund our schools on the basis of need.

We want to make sure that whichever school you go to, whether it's a Government school, a Catholic parish school, an independent school with low fees - whatever it is - we want to make sure that your children are going to get a great education.

So that's what our schools policy is about, making sure that the allocation of resources is fair.

It's just not fair to give a 200 per cent increase in funding to the Kings School or Trinity Grammar or Geelong Grammar.

That's what the Howard Government has done over the last four years.

What we want to do is take that money and give it to much more needy, non-Government schools, schools that don't have decent classrooms or decent toilets in some cases.

Let's get that money to where it's really needed.

TONY JONES: Don't you think that the headlines that you've been seeing that Labor is heading wealthy schools, Labor has a hit list of wealthy schools is actually helping you motivate your political base?

JENNY MACKLIN: What we're doing is saying to those schools is that they really didn't need these massive increases that they've got from the Howard Government over the last four years and we think it's only fair that that money be re-allocated to other needy, non-government schools.

That's what the policy is all about.

We've also allocated $1.9 billion extra to Government schools because so many of our Government schools are also struggling and they really haven't got their fair share from the Howard Government either.

So the policy is all about fairness, it's all about making sure that children, wherever they are, get a great education, and our policy is aimed straight down that line, nothing else.

TONY JONES: But this is, in effect, a simple redistribution of wealth, isn't it?

These schools - the Kings School, Trinity Grammar, Geelong Grammar and others like it don't need that additional money.

I mean, look at the resources of the Kings School - rifle ranges, swimming pools, vast playing fields, a museum, a full-time archivist - for goodness sake, and yet we have other schools that couldn't, even in their wildest dreams, imagine those resources.

Let's get the money where it is really needed.

That's what Labor's policy is about.

TONY JONES: You obviously think that the kids in those wealthy schools are getting too much and now you're going to take some of that away.

JENNY MACKLIN: We are going to take some of the money away from those wealthy schools because we don't think they need it.

There are other schools, in the non-Government sector, that do really need it.

Many, many Catholic parish schools, for example, one in my own electorate in Melbourne - St Pius X - has no green playing space.

I think it's better to give some extra money to those schools rather than do what the Howard Government did and give an extra $2 million to the Kings School over the last four years.

I don't think that's good schools policy, so we will be changing it.

TONY JONES: What about those parents that Brendon Nelson cites that are scrimping to keep their kids in these private schools with 15-year-old cars and second mortgages and extra jobs?

What about those people, because now almost inevitably they're going to face higher fees and some of those kids will have to leave those schools, won't they?

JENNY MACKLIN: Well, in fact, the Kings School got an extra $2 million from the Howard Government and put its fees up, back in 2001 when they got the increase by 7.5 per cent, so it doesn't seem to matter whether you give them a big increase or not, they still put their fees up.

Our objective is to make sure that those parents who are in many cases struggling to send their children to non-Government schools at much lower fees than students are paying at the Kings School, we want to help those parents who are the vast majority of parents with children in non-Government schools.

2,500 non-Government schools and their parents and children will benefit from Labor's policy because they're the schools that will get the benefit of the funding that will be redirected to them.

TONY JONES: Do you accept that it is inevitable that in these private schools that are now losing under your policy, would lose large sums of public money, it is inevitable that they will have to put their fees up?

JENNY MACKLIN: I don't think it's inevitable at all, no.

That's a matter of choice for them.

It's really entirely up to them.

They didn't have this money four years ago and it really is a matter for them.

I would say to them that, of course, I don't want to see extra pressure put on those parents.

If they can do without one less rifle range, that would be a good thing.

TONY JONES: What do you say, though, to those people who say, "We should be getting our share of the education tax dollar. That's tax money we pay and if we sent our kids to public schools it would actually cost the Government, cost the public purse a lot more."

JENNY MACKLIN: Labor will be providing a basic grant to all children in all non-Government schools, so there will be a basic level of support for all of them, but what we're saying is over and above that basic grant, we really think funding should be on need.

The money should go where it's needed most.

We don't want to see increased taxpayers money going to schools that patently aren't needy.

The principal of the Kings School himself said that that school is not a needy school.

I don't think anyone who has ever seen it would say it is a needy school, and yet most of us know our local Catholic parish schools, many, many of them are needy schools, so let's get the money where it's going to be put to good use.

TONY JONES: Did you consider going even further with these wealthy schools and taking away their income tax-free status?

JENNY MACKLIN: No, we didn't.

What we've done is set a national schools resource standard and we want to lift all children up to that standard.

There are 5 per cent of students in schools, in non-Government schools, that are currently funded over that standard and it's those schools that will either have a reduction in their funding or which will be funding guaranteed.

TONY JONES: I've got to ask you about one of the big stories of the night.

Pauline Hanson is going to run in Queensland, where you are now, for the Senate, she has announced today.

What does it tell you about the political climate that she thinks she has a chance of getting back in?

TONY JONES: Finally, a quick question on the national security debate.

Jenny Macklin, is it your understanding that Labor will actually accept the Government's proposition that a new campaign of anti-terrorism ads will be allowed to go ahead in the lead-up to the election?

JENNY MACKLIN: Well, there certainly are discussions going on between the Government and the Labor Party about this advertising campaign, but I really should leave any further comment on that issue to Kim Beazley or Kevin Rudd who will be discussing those issue with the Government.

TONY JONES: But it's your understanding that Labor won't oppose this?

JENNY MACKLIN: Well, if, of course, these are important ads to be shown, I'm sure, for national security purposes, we would agree, but I would rather leave further comment to the people who are involved in the discussions.

TONY JONES: Even though this is a public funded ad campaign that, in effect, plays into John Howard's political strengths, you would say, security issues?

JENNY MACKLIN: Well, Labor will always do what's right for the nation's security and I'm sure if our people who are involved in the discussions think that it's in our national interest, then we will agree to it.